2.
Ramana said that every time a thought arises, one should enquire as to the
origin of it. If for example I look at something and make a judgment, or
formulate a plan of what I will do, Ramana would say I should stop and look at
where the thoughts originate. The idea being doing so eventually puts one into
a state beyond the mind or "I."
3.
I practiced self-enquiry consistently over the past couple years, and as I did
so I spent some time reading and watching the content made by two nondualists -
Gary Weber and Rich Doyle. I used this practice to overcome some particular bad
mental habits I still had - though after accomplishing that I stopped the
practice.
4.
I admit I concluded that "there was no perfect nondual state" beyond
the relatively quiet mind. It seemed that after all that practice I should have
felt or at least intuited some sort of change: that is, a shift to an
otherworldly state of "universal I," of losing identification with
the body, of feeling a concrete sense of I-hood in "all."
5.
The comments from Jeff and Bodhi are affirming this state, it seems, as
something verifiable. So, I am contemplating it again.
6.
To be of value, this has to be a real and verifiable thing; not something
temporary, or artificial, or a case of mental projection.
7.
Here I am confronted by a philosophical issue. As from one perspective, it
seems these two phenomena are at war: "universal I" and the OOBE.
8.
The OOBE seems to be an affirmation of dualism; that is, "here is my body"
and "here is my awareness"; now when I go OOB my awareness is "here"
and has an independent existence. "I" do this and this.
9.
If I read William Buhlman's book, he explains how the nonphysical world is
thought responsive; one can direct one's thoughts to review a past life, be
transported somewhere, or take on a different form. He also readily invokes the
use of thought in his induction methods.
10.
In contrast we can look at Gary Weber - another spiritual teacher I've enjoyed.
Gary argues for the supremacy of the nondual state he has attained. While he
believes in predestination, and a consciousness "field" (like in The Gita) that may send
manifestations of itself into the world, he dismisses karma, reincarnation, and
the OOBE.
11.
Jeff Brooks' view does seem to incorporate elements of both of these. He affirms the
OOBE as necessary for enlightenment - so it's unlikely he'd accept Gary's state
as "complete." Yet Jeff also seems to affirm the indispensability of
the nondual state, which seems to go further than Buhlman's experience.
12.
I think of a story from the Maharshi
I read which is a clear account of an OOBE (this was years before the concept of this existed in the popular mind); or of a reference of his I read to
a nonphysical reality. Perhaps both the dualists and nondualists are onto
something. It may be these two views are both true, though I would need additional direct
experience to verify this.
